Case 3315914/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Janusz, Employment Advisor For the v Mr R Mathea, Managing Director — 2022
- Case reference
- 3315914/2021
- Decision date
- 14 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Janusz, Employment Advisor For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages covering unpaid wages for March and April 2021 and accrued holiday pay on termination. The respondent said it was entitled to deduct losses said to arise from poor work and spoiled baked goods.
Employment Judge George found that the claimant worked 19 days in March 2021 and 14 days in April 2021, and that the bonus rate was £12 per day. The tribunal accepted that there had been quality problems and that the claimant had signed an addendum on 12 April 2021 purporting to allow deductions for quality issues directly attributable to him, but it was not satisfied that the respondent had shown the deductions made fell within the scope of that addendum or that the claimant was solely responsible for the relevant losses. The tribunal also noted that the March payment was due on 15 April 2021, so deductions could not be justified by conduct occurring before the addendum took effect.
The tribunal calculated gross sums of £1,919.68 for March pay, £1,343.36 for April pay, £168 for 14 days' bonus and £459 for holiday pay, totalling £3,890.04 gross. After crediting a £200 part-payment and applying tax and national insurance, it ordered the respondent to pay £3,110.37 net. That was the bottom-line award recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment treated unpaid March and April wages, bonus, and accrued holiday pay as part of a single unauthorised deduction from wages complaint. The tribunal did not split the final award between those components; it ordered payment of a single net sum after tax, national insurance, and a £200 part-payment credit. | Upheld | — | £3,110 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,110
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 ERA 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.